\begin{table}[htpb]\begin{center} \caption{Second stage and Reduced Form Results from 2SLS Results}\label{table:table10}\begin{tabular}{lcccc} \toprule
 &  \shortstack{Visited FP\\clinic} & \shortstack{Use modern\\method}  & \shortstack{Beliefs about FP\\use in village} & \shortstack{Allowed to visit health\\facility with someone} \\ & (1) & (2) & (3) & (4)  \\ \midrule \multicolumn{5}{l}{A. Second Stage} \\
\# close outside peers   &       0.664*  &       0.111   &       2.607***&       0.103   \\
                         &     [0.345]   &     [0.350]   &     [0.966]   &     [0.072]   \\


\multicolumn{5}{l}{B. Reduced Form} \\
 $ Prop_{cv} \times MIL_{i} $ &      -0.152*  &      -0.024   &      -0.596*  &      -0.024   \\
                         &     [0.083]   &     [0.082]   &     [0.321]   &     [0.017]   \\
N                        &         671   &         670   &         671   &         671   \\
\bottomrule \\[-5ex] \end{tabular} \end{center} \begin{tablenotes} This table reports coefficients from specification (6) in PanelAand the reduced form estimates for our IV estimation in Panel B. Each coefficient is from a separate regression. The outcome variables are: an indicator for whether a woman has ever visited a health facility for reproductive health, fertility, or family planning services in column (1); an indicator for whether a woman is using a modern method of contraception at the time of survey in column (2); a categorical variable that takes values 0 to 6 with higher values indicating a woman's belief that more women in her village use family planning in column (3); and an indicator for whether a woman is usually allowed to visit a health facility with someone in column (4). Robust standard errors in brackets are clustered at the village level. \sym{*}\(p<0.1\),\sym{**}\(p<0.05\),\sym{***}\(p<0.01\). \end{tablenotes} \end{table}
